February 21, 2007: Youngest surviving premature baby

[SeanAhern]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Not my business, or yours, what a woman chooses to do with her body.

Unfortunately, I have the beginnings of a migraine this evening, so I can't get into a longer discussion responding to tw, as I'd like. But I will point out that he's staying on the right track.

The issue has never really been about what a woman chooses to do with her own body. It's deciding whether she has the right to choose what to do with someone else's body. The issue is the "personhood" of the life within her. It's not her body we're discussing, really. It has to do with defining when society deems the life within her to have reached a state where it is deserving of the legal protections of people.

In lieu of having being able to have a longer discussion, I'm going to have to point to one of the more rational thinkers of the last few decades, Carl Sagan, who struck a middle ground in this debate. Much of his logic is sound, and provides a good basis to argue from: http://www.2think.org/abortion.shtml

[xoxoxoBruce]

It's not her body we're discussing, really.

The hell it isn't. As long as it's attached, it's as much a part of her as her head, hand or appendix. A turd is not part of her body, a fetus is. :p

[SeanAhern]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

The hell it isn't. As long as it's attached, it's as much a part of her as her head, hand or appendix. A turd is not part of her body, a fetus is. :p

And yet, each can survive when separated from the other. The same can be said for no other thing. Which is why I still stand by my statement that the question of the "personhood of the fetus" is the primary question.

[Undertoad]

Very few abortions take place at this point 5 1/2 months in. The current legal point is close to that.

I would support viability as the point at which an abortion should not take place. But we don't want to get into the business of removing fetuses and trying to incubate each and every one of them.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

...
... But we don't want to get into the business of removing fetuses and trying to incubate each and every one of them.

If that's a solution that a woman agrees to, and the anti-choice contingent (and only the anti-choice contingent) wants to privately pay for, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Just don't increase my healthcare costs or taxes to do it. The anti-choice contingent would also be privately responsible for the cost of raising the results.

[Aliantha]

Giving birth to a baby 240 cm in length would be very painful.

[Undertoad]

yikes updated

[SPUCK]

not if it was snake shaped...

[milkfish]

How unpleasant. How about we talk about the world's oldest surviving premature baby (40 weeks minus 1 second) instead?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Do you mean fetus or baby?

[Aliantha]

Arguing about whether it's the personhood that's the issue or the woman with the little clump of cells inside her is an argument much akin to the chicken or the egg discussion.

In this case, I vote for first in first served. Therefor, the womans rights come before the clump of cells because if the woman weren't there already, there'd be no clump of cells.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Ha Ha Ha, I read that post then looked down at the cookie at the bottom of the page, which read;

The anti-abortion protesters were told by a federal judge that they can't physically block the entrances to clinics. Now they're going to take their case all the way to the supreme court. Kinda ironic, isn't it, when you think about it, they're demanding the right to do whatever they want with their own bodies. --Dennis Miller